David Josephs Wrote:Alan Ford Wrote:You are an excellent researcher, Mr. Joseph, absolutely admire and appreciate your keen insights.
In respect to the whole bus/cab scenario, I personally don't believe the wrongfully accused was anywhere near a bus or cab that afternoon, in spite of officialdom putting words into a deadman's mouth to the contrary.
I once set out many moons ago to research the phantom bus and cab rides, but upon reading the following Warren Commission testimony from Mrs. Bledsoe, who swore up and down she saw the wrongfully accused on her bus, I caught her in a lie that suggests she is also lying about the phantom bus encounter as well. One lie needs another lie....Here's her outright lie as she describes an early encounter with Oswald on October 7, 1963 when she was showing him a room she had for rent (please note this encounter takes place weeks before the birth of his 2nd infant child, Rachel, later that month ---->
Mr. JENNER - He told you at that time and informed you that he was unemployed?
Mrs. BLEDSOE - Yes.
Mr. JENNER - And he would be seeking work?
Mrs. BLEDSOE - Yes.
Mr. JENNER - And he said that he was going to bring his wife?
Mrs. BLEDSOE - Yes.
Mr. JENNER - And--when and if he obtained employment?
Mrs. BLEDSOE - And so, that give me a lead, something to talk about, and I said, "Well, what kind of work do you do? "Oh, I do electronics," he said, and I said, "Well, there is some good jobs because you are young, and you can get a good job a young man like you."
And then went on. Then something about him being in the Marines, and I said, "Well, that is wonderful. My son was in the Navy." And talking about him, you know, just getting to know him, and--but, "here is a picture of my wife, and picture of the girl, and the baby." And I said, "Oh, she has got a baby, hasn't she?" And he said, "Yes."
Thank you so much for the kind words Alan.
Sadly I will have to disagree with your assessment of what was said by Bledsoe. Below is the calendar she speaks of and what could have passed for the images shown given the comments.
I'm just not sure based on what is said and not knowing what was shown that he would be showing any "baby" photos.
I'm fairly sure that it was a 2 part sentence with 2 photos being shown.
1) here is a picture of my wife and
2) picture of the girl (Marina) and the baby (June) - the photo on the right includes Ozzie of course so it may not have been the one shown... I'd have to go dig to see if we can find which images he showed her.
"here is a picture of my wife, and picture of the girl, and the baby"
Yet I could be totally off here and the testimony could have been contrived... I just find that hard to believe given what they knew about when everyone was born by the time she testifies.
That afternoon though, her descrption of the arrest shirt - imo - gives away her complicit nature.
Oh, and McWatters once again said it was not Oswald... why, I wonder, is that not enough for some folk.
DJ
Appreciate the photos, Mr. Joseph, and without taking anything away from them, please note that the conflict with Mrs. Bledsoe is centered upon her testimony per her engagement/interactions with the wrongfully accused on October 7, 1963, where, yes, she could have been shown a picture of Oswald's wife (Marina) and her accompanying their infant (June) in a dated pictured in Russia, but where Mrs. Bledsoe outright lies is when she makes the critical mistake of saying she saw all of the following:
here is a picture of my wife, and picture of the girl, and the baby." Wife equals Marina, "picture of the girl" equals June their oldest child, and, of course, "and the baby" equals Raquel who is yet to be born, let alone captured in a photograph twelve days before her birth during Mrs. Bledsoe's exchange in reference to the date of October 7, 1963.
That lie pales in my opinion compared to the evidence you have presented that clearly shows officialdom having no choice but to put him on that bus, because they had to lie, otherwise, no retrieval of a revolver, nor an engagement by the wrongfully accused with the slain officer at 10th and Patton. Your presentation on Mr. McWatters' testimony alone refutes the phantom bus ride...not to mention, given the intense struggle that ensued in the Texas Theatre that alone wouldn't leave a bus transfer in pristine condition (where have we heard this dynamic before @ pristine)? How magical can all the "evidence" be? We have a ripped shirt, multiple torn buttons, but like magic looky here a smooth, even, untorn bus transfer. Right!
and, of course, that's IF he remembered to move it to the new shirt he put on if one wants to believe their phantom bus ride to change clothes, retrieve revolver, that he somehow forgets to bring to the designated decoy position, err sniper's nest to shoot his way out of the building). Your McWatter's presentation alone refutes officialdom's contrived attempt to place him in the same neighborhood with the slain officer.
*Sidebar, without venturing too far away from Mr. Joseph's brilliant presentation: researcher Bill Drenas (sp) does one remarkable presentation of his own where he puts Officer Tippitt between 12:17PM--12:20PM picking up a female shoplifter from a business establishment, where the owner of the establishment watches him place her into his cruiser...no mention of what becomes of this woman...25 minutes later more than a few eyewitnesses place Tippitt at the Gloco gas station between 12:45PM-12:51PM watching traffic cross the Houston Street viaduct as if he is waiting for someone, before tearing off at a high rate of speed towards his fate.
Now, back on track, as we can see/determine in Mr. Joseph's presentation, McWatter's testimony clearly refutes the wrongfully accused taking his bus. Yes, no doubt, someone taller and heavier than the wrongfully accused, wearing a Blue coat did take McWatter's bus, but not the wrongfully accused.